Wow, thanks for the kind words (you too, Rusty Austin). Yes, I do write Congresspeople (and not just to pester; I praise them, too, when they rarely do something that makes me happy, or when I feel like giving them support and/or information that I think would help them).

Great coverage of a surreal event, Ms. Dahl -- the Right is so looney, even their strawmen have strawmen. Those chickenhawks wanted some bloody, red meat thrown to them, and Newt treated them to a bucket of icewater. I agree that they really just want somebody to hate; they don't want to actually have to engage in that toxic liberal introspection. So I'm sure all those little fuzzy chickenhawks were very disappointed.

Newt's smart. I don't think there's anybody who'd dispute that. He's also an opportunist -- he rode the Reaganite wave hard in the 80s, made his name as a partisan pit bull, and profited from that until his fall as Speaker. I remember when he was the snide Young Turk of the GOP, laying into the Democrats in vitriolic speeches to an empty House of Representatives, and it's a sign of how far the GOP has lurched into Fascist (errr, Unitary Executive) Country that somebody like Gingrich appears as the voice of reason.

I imagine he does feel that the Party has left him behind in their zeal to destroy everything good about this country. Maybe he is planning some kind of Bloombergian Third Way. I doubt he's honestly regretting the monster he helped unleash on America; that would take more conscience than I think the man is capable of having.

But I suspect he's smart enough to see the writing on the wall for the GOP in its current configuration, and figures he doesn't want to be on the losing team* and is trying to find a way out; I doubt he'll be able to change many of those closed little minds. Maybe some will become disillusioned enough to become, I dunno, Libertarians?

*I say "losing" because if the GOP wins at what they're attempting (e.g., Unitary Executive legalistic coup), America loses; but if America is able to fight them off, then they're finished as a party. Somebody sharp as Newt has to realize the Know-Nothings won't want an egghead like him among them if he won't pander to them.

You're throwing some red meat to us, now, Mr. Shapiro, by interviewing Lieberman on Salon. I could almost hear his mawkish, smug voice as I read those answers. Lordy, where to begin?

it will be a very damaging loss of credibility for us.

Our credibility's already shot in the Middle East, Mr. Lieberman. It's largely shot worldwide, in case you hadn't noticed, and this is tied to our opportunistic invasion of Iraq, and our unilateralism.

If we just pull out of there, not only are we going to be risking the lives of our troops who are there, but we will be doing exactly what Iran and al-Qaida want us to do. It will have a terrible effect on the whole region.

Two things to that: 1) are we letting Iran et al. dictate our policy? Then they really are the biggest winners of Gulf War II. And 2) the regions' not doing too well as it is. But I'm sure our multi-billion military aid package will help that, right? Oh, and do any of your defense industry constituents benefit from that, I wonder?

Iran is trying to support anybody who will put pressure on us to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan.

That's because the US has invaded and occupied countries on either side of it, don't you think? I'd think they'd have a national interest in not allowing themselves to be outflanked! Look at how hysterical the US got when little Cuba went Communist -- a 45-year embargo and counting (along with attempted invasions, blockades, assassination attempts, subversion, etc.) And that's just Cuba -- Iraq and Afghanistan are far larger in relation to Iran than Cuba is to us.

Imagine if China conquered Canada and Mexico -- wouldn't the US support anybody and anything to try to change that situation? Of course we would. Sloppy Joe is trying to paint something sinister in Iran's actions, when it's far likelier to be a case of national self-defense. Their actions are, at least, comprehensible.

I would have liked to have seen some questions about whether Lieberman's hawkish support for the War on Terror is tied to his extensive connections to the defense industry. I'm sure that would've gotten that right foot a-tapping all the faster, and he'd have kicked you out of the room, no doubt.